Literature DB >> 22764016

Mixed treatment comparisons using aggregate and individual participant level data.

Pedro Saramago1, Alex J Sutton, Nicola J Cooper, Andrea Manca.   

Abstract

Mixed treatment comparisons (MTC) extend the traditional pair-wise meta-analytic framework to synthesize information on more than two interventions. Although most MTCs use aggregate data (AD), a proportion of the evidence base might be available at the individual level (IPD). We develop a series of novel Bayesian statistical MTC models to allow for the simultaneous synthesis of IPD and AD, potentially incorporating study and individual level covariates. The effectiveness of different interventions to increase the provision of functioning smoke alarms in households with children was used as a motivating dataset. This included 20 studies (11 AD and 9 IPD), including 11 500 participants. Incorporating the IPD into the network allowed the inclusion of information on subject level covariates, which produced markedly more accurate treatment-covariate interaction estimates than an analysis solely on the AD from all studies. Including evidence at the IPD level in the MTC is desirable when exploring participant level covariates; even when IPD is available only for a fraction of the studies. Such modelling may not only reduce inconsistencies within networks of trials but also assist the estimation of intervention subgroup effects to guide more individualised treatment decisions.
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22764016     DOI: 10.1002/sim.5442

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  38 in total

1.  Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis and Network Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Suzanne C Freeman
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2022

2.  Network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials: reporting the proper summaries.

Authors:  Jing Zhang; Bradley P Carlin; James D Neaton; Guoxing G Soon; Lei Nie; Robert Kane; Beth A Virnig; Haitao Chu
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2013-10-03       Impact factor: 2.486

3.  Testing moderation in network meta-analysis with individual participant data.

Authors:  Getachew A Dagne; C Hendricks Brown; George Howe; Sheppard G Kellam; Lei Liu
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2016-02-02       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Accounting for Heterogeneity in Relative Treatment Effects for Use in Cost-Effectiveness Models and Value-of-Information Analyses.

Authors:  Nicky J Welton; Marta O Soares; Stephen Palmer; Anthony E Ades; David Harrison; Manu Shankar-Hari; Kathy M Rowan
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2015-02-23       Impact factor: 2.583

5.  Network meta-analysis combining individual patient and aggregate data from a mixture of study designs with an application to pulmonary arterial hypertension.

Authors:  Howard H Z Thom; Gorana Capkun; Annamaria Cerulli; Richard M Nixon; Luke S Howard
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2015-04-12       Impact factor: 4.615

Review 6.  Methods and characteristics of published network meta-analyses using individual patient data: protocol for a scoping review.

Authors:  Areti Angeliki Veroniki; Charlene Soobiah; Andrea C Tricco; Meghan J Elliott; Sharon E Straus
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2015-04-29       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  The effectiveness of different interventions to promote poison prevention behaviours in households with children: a network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Felix A Achana; Alex J Sutton; Denise Kendrick; Persephone Wynn; Ben Young; David R Jones; Stephanie J Hubbard; Nicola J Cooper
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-04-20       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 8.  Is network meta-analysis as valid as standard pairwise meta-analysis? It all depends on the distribution of effect modifiers.

Authors:  Jeroen P Jansen; Huseyin Naci
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2013-07-04       Impact factor: 8.775

9.  Evidence synthesis for decision making 3: heterogeneity--subgroups, meta-regression, bias, and bias-adjustment.

Authors:  Sofia Dias; Alex J Sutton; Nicky J Welton; A E Ades
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 2.583

10.  A two-stage prediction model for heterogeneous effects of treatments.

Authors:  Konstantina Chalkou; Ewout Steyerberg; Matthias Egger; Andrea Manca; Fabio Pellegrini; Georgia Salanti
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 2.497

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.